Мы не ограничены наличием только одной зависимости, которая может возвращать такой тип данных.

///

## Другие модели { #other-models }

Теперь вы можете получать текущего пользователя напрямую в *функциях-обработчиках пути* и работать с механизмами безопасности на уровне **внедрения зависимостей**, используя `Depends`.

                        null,
                        true));

        // Verify that we get the same exception when the artifactId does not match the module name
        assertExceptionMessageContains("", "anotherArtifact");

        // Verify that no exception is thrown when the artifactId is the module name
        when(artifact.getArtifactId()).thenReturn("org.foo.bar");
        projectManager.attachArtifact(project, artifact, artifactPath);

<module>
<source path="">
  <!-- Hack to keep collect from hiding collect.testing supersource: -->
  <exclude name="**/testing/**"/>
</source>

<!--
    We used to set this only for packages that had manual supersource. That
    worked everywhere that I know of except for one place: when running the GWT
    util.concurrent tests under Guava.

    The problem is that GWT responds poorly to two .gwt.xml files in the same
    Java package; see

			</plugin>
			<plugin>
				<artifactId>maven-jar-plugin</artifactId>
				<configuration>
					<archive>
						<manifestEntries>
							<Automatic-Module-Name>org.codelibs.fess.crawler.lasta</Automatic-Module-Name>
						</manifestEntries>
					</archive>
				</configuration>
			</plugin>
			<plugin>
				<groupId>com.mycila</groupId>
				<artifactId>license-maven-plugin</artifactId>

import com.google.inject.Binder;
import com.google.inject.Module;
import com.google.inject.name.Names;
import org.apache.maven.api.services.Interpolator;
import org.apache.maven.api.xml.XmlNode;
import org.apache.maven.extension.internal.CoreExtensionEntry;
import org.apache.maven.impl.model.DefaultInterpolator;
import org.apache.maven.internal.xml.XmlPlexusConfiguration;
import org.apache.maven.model.v4.MavenTransformer;

        <configuration>
          <velocityBasedir>${project.basedir}/../../src/mdo</velocityBasedir>
          <version>1.2.0</version>
          <models>
            <model>src/main/mdo/metadata.mdo</model>
          </models>
          <templates>
            <template>model.vm</template>
          </templates>
          <params>
            <param>packageModelV4=org.apache.maven.api.metadata</param>
          </params>

        }

        @Test
        @DisplayName("should create success result")
        void shouldCreateSuccessResult() {
            Path pom1 = Paths.get("pom.xml");
            Path pom2 = Paths.get("module/pom.xml");

            UpgradeResult result = new UpgradeResult(
                    Set.of(pom1, pom2), // processed
                    Set.of(pom1), // modified
                    Set.of() // errors

Dann verwenden wir den Request direkt und extrahieren den Body als `bytes`. Das bedeutet, dass FastAPI nicht einmal versucht, die Request-Payload als JSON zu parsen.

Und dann parsen wir in unserem Code diesen YAML-Inhalt direkt und verwenden dann wieder dasselbe Pydantic-Modell, um den YAML-Inhalt zu validieren:

Et nous analysons directement ce contenu YAML, puis nous utilisons à nouveau le même modèle Pydantic pour valider le contenu YAML :

{* ../../docs_src/path_operation_advanced_configuration/tutorial007.py hl[26:33] *}

/// tip | Astuce

Ici, nous réutilisons le même modèle Pydantic.

Mais nous aurions pu tout aussi bien pu le valider d'une autre manière.

        <artifactId>modello-maven-plugin</artifactId>
        <configuration>
          <version>1.2.0</version>
          <models>
            <model>src/main/mdo/core-extensions.mdo</model>
          </models>
          <templates>
            <template>model.vm</template>
          </templates>
          <params>
            <param>locationTracking=true</param>